To everyone,
Just wait for February 11, 2022, for the oral argument. If there
are at least two women judges on the three-judges panel, just
lower your Amrn average further.
There many here that pretend to play devil’s advocate.
But they are disingenuous, and are wasting our counsel’s very precious time.
I am very confident in our counsel’s preparation because he has spent way more time
on this case than any of the defendants’ counsel.
Our counsel is extremely focused as evidenced by submitting outstanding brief/reply that
resulted in the three assigned judges awarding an oral argument.
I am confident that our counsel will be very familiar with every obscure case study that one or more
judges may potentially ask him during those 15 minutes.
But the toughest questions will most likely be asked to the defendants’ counsel to explain judge Du’s unaddressed issues to a) judicial mistake through statistical error b) cropped up table without legend versus uncropped table with full legend
c) disingenuous statements by Defendants’ expert witness.
This case has gone way too far for the activists shareholders to lose as each statement made is backed by a case law.
As another poster recently indicated, this inevitable victory will be taught in law schools in the future. Justice will served this time as this Court is concerned with judicial mistake, false witness testimony, and fraud. There are no split court on these issues but a three women judges abbreviated MNO will be ideal. I personally is looking forward to seeing judge Newman and chief judge Moore.
There is absolutely nothing to worry about.
Just inexhaustible patience until February 11, 2022.
